Calls for the GOP to Break Out of Its “Media Cocoon”

Politico has a piece today on some conservatives’ calls for the GOP to break out of its self-reinforcing echo chamber: The GOP’s Media Cocoon.

A long-simmering generational battle in the conservative movement is boiling over after last week’s shellacking, with younger operatives and ideologues going public with calls that Republicans break free from a political-media cocoon that has become intellectually suffocating and self-defeating.

GOP officials have chalked up their electoral thumping to everything from the country’s changing demographics to an ill-timed hurricane and failed voter turn-out system, but a cadre of Republicans under 50 believes the party’s problem is even more fundamental.

The party is suffering from Pauline Kaelism.

Kael was The New Yorker movie critic who famously said in the wake of Richard M. Nixon’s 49-state landslide in 1972 that she knew only one person who voted for Nixon.

Now, many young Republicans worry, they are the ones in the hermetically sealed bubble — except it’s not confined to geography but rather a self-selected media universe in which only their own views are reinforced and an alternate reality is reflected.

Hence the initial denial and subsequent shock on the right that the country would not only reelect President Barack Obama — but do so with 332 electoral votes.

“What Republicans did so successfully, starting with critiquing the media and then creating our own outlets, became a bubble onto itself,” said Ross Douthat, the 32-year-old New York Times columnist.

Nice sounding words, right? But I don’t believe for a second that the Republican Party is going to be able to reverse this downward spiral; the appeals to racism and xenophobia are far too ingrained in the very identity of the GOP. I predict that the trends will go in the exact opposite direction — even more extremist — and the party will continue purging moderates and pandering to the far right and the religious right, only more so.

I believe the only changes we’ll see will be changes for the worse. It would be wonderful if I’m proven wrong, but I won’t be.

The bubble is highly profitable for a lot of people. That's the main reason it exists. Wingnut farms are highly productive.

Yep - these "young conservatives" (most of whom actually aren't very young) are missing the point. There's money to be made by feeding hatred - lots of it. This is a far stronger force than any "young conservative's" pipe dreams.

The GOP, as a party, has been mainlining hate, bigotry, and ignorance for too long; if they don't have some sort of intervention (meaning that remaining "moderates" need to grow some balls and work towards marginalizing and pushing out the RWNJs), the party will end up face-down in a gutter with a needle in its arm.

A long-simmering generational battle in the conservative movement is boiling over after last week’s shellacking, with younger operatives and ideologues going public with calls that Republicans break free from a political-media cocoon that has become intellectually suffocating and self-defeating.

GOP officials have chalked up their electoral thumping to everything from the country’s changing demographics to an ill-timed hurricane and failed voter turn-out system, but a cadre of Republicans under 50 believes the party’s problem is even more fundamental.

But at its core, it's not money that's the motivating factor for most of these people - it's atavism and bigotry. That's why Fox and Limbaugh and the rest of the right wing noise machine are able to squeeze so much money out of the rubes - because they're true believers in that reactionary hatred.

Conservative media doesn't appeal to racism and xenophobia, they encourage it. If they didn't give voice to people like Bryan Fischer, Rush Limbaugh, and Bill O'Reilly, fewer people would think it's okay to be a bigot. They're actually cultivating bigotry...and they're doing it for profit.

Yep - these "young conservatives" (most of whom actually aren't very young) are missing the point. There's money to be made by feeding hatred - lots of it. This is a far stronger force than any "young conservative's" pipe dreams.

The thing is though a lot of the right wing media outlets continually reinforce the idea that we have to get the right people elected to bring about real change and when that doesn't happen...then what?

I mean to me it's something a boy who cried wolf scenario. How many election thrashings will it take before conservatives realize the ideas espoused by the media outlets are just not getting them into the White House??

To me I think we're seeing the beginning of a slow burn as a younger generation of Republicans pushes aside the old Guard. I think come the 2020 elections the GOP will look VERY different.

But I don’t believe for a second that the Republican Party is going to be able to reverse this downward spiral; the appeals to racism and xenophobia are far too ingrained in the very identity of the GOP. I predict that the trends will go in the exact opposite direction — even more extremist — and the party will continue purging moderates and pandering to the far right and the religious right, only more so.

The forces aligned against them are immense, there's the RW mediaverse, the breitbrat/hot air troll hordes who get released like hounds anytime someone goes out of bounds, and the fact that almost 100 percent of their big donors are so fundamentalist.

Even though Fox News definitely exploits the right for profit, I think it's a mistake to say they're just interested in making money. I've met several top Fox executives, and they really do believe in the right wing line - it's not an act.

I saw the when Karl Rove got trounced for daring to even indirectly criticize Tea Party darling Christine O'Donnel - despite the fact that she lost big-time anyways and was a major embarassment to herself and the party.

That was when I knew that the GOP establishment was not able to stand up to the crazies.

It's easy for any non-hack to identify the rise of Limbaugh and the Lewinsky hearings in the 90s as the beginning of our national divide and end of the Republican party of Reagan. It is amazing that Barack Obama, president precisely because of this strategy and it's flowering in late-90s/early 2000s, is blamed for our nation's divisions. The lack of self-reflection is alarming and sociopathic. Particularly when you consider the concessions Obama has made to conservatives these last four years. When all the House has to do to meet him is let the Bush tax cuts expire, raising the rate 3% on any income over $250,000, and they won't do it out of spite, that's a party that deserves to lose by landslides for infinity.

Grayson continued: “It’s very striking for me living in Cambridge now. My Facebook feed, which is full of mostly conservatives from Kentucky, contains very different links to articles or topics than what I see in Cambridge. It is sort of the reverse up here. They don’t understand how anyone would eat Chick-fil-A, watch college sports or hold pro-life views.”

He's right about 2 out of 3, but sports are big there like everywhere else. Maybe not Harvard sports (unless you count rowing and beer pong).

I've said many times that the right wing is a marketing framework rather than a political instrument. They won't care about defeat as long as they can use the ideology to peddle radio ads, DVDs, home-schooling supplies, health supplements and the rest of the shoddy merchandise that is their real stock in trade.
The ideology is real enough, and sincerely accepted in some quarters, but it would be a severely marginalized footnote without the profit potential that comes from magnifying and rationalizing ordinary prejudices.

Its not going to get better for them, its going to get worse. The ones who left the GOP ranch and voted for Obama in 2012 (like my wife and I) are the worst sort of foe for the GOP, the apostates.

The ones who were lifelong supporters but abandoned ship in the wake of Tea Party racism, anti-science kookery and religious fanaticism are not coming back and instead we are bringing more of the tepid GOP supporters over to this side simply by explaining to friends and family why we left.

It's going to keep getting harder for the GOP to hold onto College degreed, politically moderate, working families.

If they really do double down on the extremism, their support won't just fade away, it will fall off the table.

Even though Fox News definitely exploits the right for profit, I think it's a mistake to say they're just interested in making money. I've met several top Fox executives, and they really do believe in the right wing line - it's not an act.

It seemed clear that anyone with foresight would hedge on who wins a close election, instead of making wildly inaccurate predictions that would be indisputably disproved on Nov 6.

Reminds me of "end of the world" cults. The insane ones pick a specific date and when that day comes they look foolish. The sane ones (con artists) never get that specific.

I've said many times that the right wing is a marketing framework rather than a political instrument. They won't care about defeat as long as they can use the ideology to peddle radio ads, DVDs, home-schooling supplies, health supplements and the rest of the shoddy merchandise that is their real stock in trade.
The ideology is real enough, and sincerely accepted in some quarters, but it would be a severely marginalized footnote without the profit potential that comes from magnifying and rationalizing ordinary prejudices.

To clarify by example, this is what is happening with creationism. A nagging prejudice in the minds of the ignorant is magnified and given some media trained spokesmen, a website, and shiny new books, and suddenly it is legitimate and respectable. The shame and self reproach of ignorance and bigotry are removed, and the ignorant bigot can deny his debased nature and hold his head high with none of the hard work of actually learning anything.

I've been saying for ages that the only thing which will pop the GOP's alternate reality bubble is a Mondale-style humiliation at the polls. I still believe that.

In the short term, they're going to double and triple down on the fail and the derp, convinced that they have a messaging problem, and that all it will take is a TRUE CONSERVATIVE™ nominee and a Latino version of El Rushbo to win. They won't learn anything until they nominate a pure ideologue and get their ass handed to them.

I see no desire or real inclination to adapt to the realities of 2012 America by many in the GOP. They think they can just run the 1980 template model combined with some Tea Party nonsense and think that's going to work with the American people. Conservative pundits point out that most Americans think government intervention in our personal lives is too big but they ignore that people are talking about socially conservative policies there too. Ones that the GOP supports strongly. Their big problem of problems is they're not making any real inroads with growing groups like Latinos, young people, etc. Some of them think you can just hold Marco Rubio or Bobby Jindal out there to minority voters and it would be "See, we're not all bigots." But it never works that way. There was a similar hope with Palin that women voters would see Palin and totally forget and ignore the GOP's hostility to many issues that are important to American women. If they want to succeed, they need to adapt and realize that the old way is over.

The NYT article was about what would have to happen for the Republicans to again stand a chance. Not about whether it would, in fact, happen.

Charles is probably right that it won't. Not because the bulk of those who voted for Romney are racist bigots, full of hate and drinking the Kool-Aid. But because the primaries have a dynamic of their own. A sensible, centrist Republican who might be a contender in the general election is a target throughout the primaries. He or she stands a good chance of being knocked out by triumphant zealots (who will go down in flames in the general election.) And if they fight fire with fire to win the nomination, and throw red meat to the narrow "conservative base", the price of winning the primary is to be quoted in the general election.

Rick Perry was too hopped up on percodan to be a coherent contender in the primaries, but he was right on in-state tuition for illegal aliens who grew up attending our schools. How crazy do things have to get before a Texas conservative is drummed out of the race as being too far left for the GOP? Right---pretty crazy.

There probably isn't any cure for this. The dynamics of the primaries will be that moderates either defect to the Democrats or sit out the primaries. Loons compete with shape-shifters. Either way, the general election is hopeless.

Two party politics will reemerge when today's Democrat party fractures. Perhaps over the inherent tension between the interests of state employees and the need to face up to fiscal reality. Perhaps over whether to allow wind turbines, or nuclear power, or solar power...all of these carry some local cost to the environment, even as they are our only hopes for the general good of the planet. Perhaps over some other issue where the general public good is in tension with the desires of the party's core supporters.

This is something that I've mentioned before. The roots of this new social extremism goes way back into the 1980s/1990s with groups like Pat Robertson's "Christian Coalition", who were quietly injecting their own politicians into local Republican organizations, as well as the Young Conservatives, College Republicans and their backers The Leadership Institute (who have some rather well-documented dubious ties to white nationalism).

For those of you who don't recognize that last group, here's an example of one of their banner ads that showed up on LGF this last election cycle.

1964 and 1965 led directly to the Southern Strategy.
Ronald Reagan praised states rights and opened the door to evangelicals.
Jesse Helms warned his constituents of the "Black Hands" coming to take "stuff" away from hard working Americans. Etc., etc., etc.

This stuff has been a long time in the making, and many of us were keenly aware of the GOP pattern of behavior long before Fox and Rush.

The difference now, is the animus which has been festering just below the surface, has been given a voice by RW media and the internet, so everyone can see it.

Will they see it? Will they care? Who is 'they' at this point, anyway?

Absent the smoke-filled-back-room system of the era, I don't see how a political party unmarginalizes.

I just look at the Dems from the 80's. No one thought they'd bounce back from Carter, Mondale, and Dukakis losing, but behind the scenes, especially after Mondale, there were centrist and pragmatist Dems who started laying the groundwork to kick the moonbats and hippies to the damn curb and bring the party back to the land of reason.

The GOP needs its own version of the DLC, but that won't happen until there's a nominee like Santorum or Palin that's a true wingnut believer who gets killed at the polls.

1964 and 1965 led directly to the Southern Strategy.
Ronald Reagan praised states rights and opened the door to evangelicals.
Jesse Helms warned his constituents of the "Black Hands" coming to take "stuff" away from hard working Americans. Etc., etc., etc.

This stuff has been a long time in the making, and many of us were keenly aware of the GOP pattern of behavior long before Fox and Rush.

The difference now, is the animus which has been festering just below the surface, has been given a voice by RW media and the internet, so everyone can see it.

The ugly isn't going away anytime soon, I think.

I still have no respect for Reagan at all for opening his 1980 presidential campaign where Goodman, Chaney, and Schwerner were kidnapped and later killed and talking about "states rights." And I still contend that as bad as Watergate was that the Southern Strategy is the greater blemish on Nixon's record in public life.

I just look at the Dems from the 80's. No one thought they'd bounce back from Carter, Mondale, and Dukakis losing, but behind the scenes, especially after Mondale, there were centrist and pragmatist Dems who started laying the groundwork to kick the moonbats and hippies to the damn curb and bring the party back to the land of reason.

The GOP needs its own version of the DLC, but that won't happen until there's a nominee like Santorum or Palin that's a true wingnut believer who gets killed at the polls.

I think the problem is there is no equivalent of the DLC right now. Even in the 80's there was a movement like that within the Democratic Party. There were elected officials like Bill Clinton, Chuck Robb, and others who saw that the old way wasn't working and were demonstrating via governing a new way of doing so.

1964 and 1965 led directly to the Southern Strategy.
Ronald Reagan praised states rights and opened the door to evangelicals.
Jesse Helms warned his constituents of the "Black Hands" coming to take "stuff" away from hard working Americans. Etc., etc., etc.

This stuff has been a long time in the making, and many of us were keenly aware of the GOP pattern of behavior long before Fox and Rush.

The difference now, is the animus which has been festering just below the surface, has been given a voice by RW media and the internet, so everyone can see it.

The ugly isn't going away anytime soon, I think.

I've not seen it so up front and out in the open since the sixties. Weyrich and Buckley did a much better job of keeping the crazy harnessed and working but at arm's length and plausibly deniable through the 80's and 90's. Now the new apocalyptic elders don't give a damn, so it's all out front and in everyone's face.

It's easy for any non-hack to identify the rise of Limbaugh and the Lewinsky hearings in the 90s as the beginning of our national divide and end of the Republican party of Reagan. It is amazing that Barack Obama, president precisely because of this strategy and it's flowering in late-90s/early 2000s, is blamed for our nation's divisions. The lack of self-reflection is alarming and sociopathic. Particularly when you consider the concessions Obama has made to conservatives these last four years. When all the House has to do to meet him is let the Bush tax cuts expire, raising the rate 3% on any income over $250,000, and they won't do it out of spite, that's a party that deserves to lose by landslides for infinity.

Would it suffice to let the Bush tax cuts expire (as well as raise rates on 250K+), but write the new law so that apart from this 250K+ tax bump, it's an inflation-indexed version of the pre-Bush-tax-cut code? Because if there's no adjustment for inflation, then in real terms, taxes pop to levels considerably higher than they were just before the Bush tax cuts.

The Obama proposal now on the table is not, not in any real sense, a return to an earlier state of affairs.

Seeing that article's pic of Pauline Kael made me suddenly realize that 2012 was the first election in my lifetime that wasn't primarily just Baby Boomers arguing about the 60s again. We finally have moved on as a country.

Eventually the GOP base will settle down to blaming Romney's relative moderation, his RINO-hood, for the defeat. They will double down on the crazy. Their media and leadership will follow. The result will be the nomination of a full-bore wingnut like Santorum in 2016, with an apocalyptic drubbing at the polls to follow.

I've not seen it so up front and out in the open since the sixties. Weyrich and Buckley did a much better job of keeping the crazy harnessed and working but at arm's length and plausible deniability through the 80's and 90's. Now the new apocalyptic elders don't give a damn, so it's all out front and in everyone's face.

Eventually the GOP base will settle down to blaming Romney's relative moderation, his RINO-hood, for the defeat. They will double down on the crazy. Their media and leadership will follow. The result will be the nomination of a full-bore wingnut like Santorum in 2016, with an apocalyptic drubbing at the polls to follow.

Nah---Santorum would carry an easy 50 electoral votes. That's close enough that with some extra effort and a little luck, he would have won. Indeed, he would have won but for the media blaming global warming for the January hurricane that hit Boston.

In an Oct. 26 alumni symposium at the University of Denver, Paula Broadwell said that the CIA annex at the Benghazi consulate came under assault on Sept. 11 because it had earlier “taken a couple of Libyan militia members prisoner and they think the attack on the consulate was an effort to try to get these prisoners back. It’s still being vetted.” (That information was not part of the CIA’s timeline of the Benghazi assault, and Eli Lake of the Daily Beast reports that the CIA has denied any such detention.) “I don’t know if a lot of you have heard this,” Broadwell prefaced her remarks by saying.

Curioser and curioser. Charles, this departs from what the militants themselves said as you pointed out.

In some ways, it would have been better for the GOP if Santorum or Huckabee had been nominated this year. The Obama landslide would have been awesome and nobody this side of Alex Jones on the sanity scale could muddy the waters with fake fraud charges.
The moral, intellectual, and political bankruptcy of the recent right would be obvious to all, there would be some genuine soul-searching, and the process of re-building the party might finally begin. As it is, the nuts get four more years to work their mischief and rake in their profits before the process can even begin.

I still have no respect for Reagan at all for opening his 1980 presidential campaign where Goodman, Chaney, and Schwerner were kidnapped and later killed and talking about "states rights." And I still contend that as bad as Watergate was that the Southern Strategy is the greater blemish on Nixon's record in public life.

Don't forget about Nixon also being responsible for giving credibility to Pat Buchanan. His role in Nixon's "dirty tricks" group, coupled with his helping engineer the "Southern Strategy" - Buchanan is the person who actually coined the term "silent majority" - earned him a spot as one of the people in Ronald Reagan's inner circle.

Eventually the GOP base will settle down to blaming Romney's relative moderation, his RINO-hood, for the defeat. They will double down on the crazy. Their media and leadership will follow. The result will be the nomination of a full-bore wingnut like Santorum in 2016, with an apocalyptic drubbing at the polls to follow.

Unfortunately, this situation would not probably result in a sufficiently severe defeat for the GOP to cause a real change in the party. By now, we have plenty of Red states that would vote for John Calvin in a Klan robe over any democratic party candidate.

However, defeat would be virtually certain, and the Republican establishment would try to avoid that by putting in some mouthpiece candidate (like Romney) in the primaries.

The civil war over the 2016 GOP nomination should be very interesting --- the establishment has money and power, but no votes, while the wing nuts have the votes.

Its not going to get better for them, its going to get worse. The ones who left the GOP ranch and voted for Obama in 2012 (like my wife and I) are the worst sort of foe for the GOP, the apostates.

The ones who were lifelong supporters but abandoned ship in the wake of Tea Party racism, anti-science kookery and religious fanaticism are not coming back and instead we are bringing more of the tepid GOP supporters over to this side simply by explaining to friends and family why we left.

It's going to keep getting harder for the GOP to hold onto College degreed, politically moderate, working families.

If they really do double down on the extremism, their support won't just fade away, it will fall off the table.

If the Republicans don't do some changing for the better you're going to see more groups like this.

Two party politics will reemerge when today's Democrat party fractures. Perhaps over the inherent tension between the interests of state employees and the need to face up to fiscal reality. Perhaps over whether to allow wind turbines, or nuclear power, or solar power...all of these carry some local cost to the environment, even as they are our only hopes for the general good of the planet. Perhaps over some other issue where the general public good is in tension with the desires of the party's core supporters.

The Dem factions were all disillusioned for different reasons because it turned out that the President existed within the bounds of reality and was not made of magic.

But it was the GOP that held the coalition together this year. By being so scary-crazy.

A spokesperson for the CIA Sunday declined to discuss Broadwell's relationship with Petraeus, whose wife of 37 years, Holly, is the assistant director for service member affairs at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. But the spokesperson did reject Broadwell's allegation that the CIA annex held Libyan militia members as prisoners, telling the Beast:

"The CIA has not had detention authority since January 2009, when Executive Order 13491 was issued. Any suggestion that the Agency is still in the detention business is uninformed and baseless."

Don't forget about Nixon also being responsible for giving credibility to Pat Buchanan. His role in Nixon's "dirty tricks" group, coupled with his helping engineer the "Southern Strategy" - Buchanan is the person who actually coined the term "silent majority" - earned him a spot as one of the people in Ronald Reagan's inner circle.

Don't forget about Nixon also being responsible for giving credibility to Pat Buchanan. His role in Nixon's "dirty tricks" group, coupled with his helping engineer the "Southern Strategy" - Buchanan is the person who actually coined the term "silent majority" - earned him a spot as one of the people in Ronald Reagan's inner circle.

The republican establishment has long used the wingnuts as a source of votes and volunteers, without any intention of enacting wing nut policies. Now they have created a Frankenstein monster that is out of their control.

Noted. At this point I don't know who to believe, unless it's nobody yet. It's not as if mistresses/spokespeople are reliable sources. It's not as if the CIA is shy about lying to protect secrets. I'm still wait and see. wait and see if it takes a Freedom of Information action to sort it out just before the next election.

But what would her motive be to make this up? Just craving the spotlight for a while?

I think if the CIA were really holding prisoners secretly, their statement would have been much less direct. The consequences for lying about this would be huge, because as they pointed out they no longer have the authority to do this.

This is a case where Occam's Razor is clearly cutting on the side of the CIA.

Their slogan should be "We voted for Eisenhower in '52, '56, '08, and '12."

Eisenhower was far from perfect. Keep in mind the fact that he approved, and gave logistical support (via the CIA) to the military coup in Iran that ousted a democratically-elected Prime Minister (Mohammad Mosaddegh) in 1953 to install a dictator who was friendly to United States business interests - a Shah whose regime was so brutal that the eventual backlash spurred the 1979 revolution that brought us the current crop of Islamic extremists running the country today.

Agreed. But I don't necessarily hold terror/militia forces in real high regard either. The CIA record on truth telling is best kindly described as umm... variable. Obama has more credibility with me than anyone else involved.

Noted. At this point I don't know who to believe, unless it's nobody yet. It's not as if mistresses/spokespeople are reliable sources. It's not as if the CIA is shy about lying to protect secrets. I'm still wait and see. wait and see if it takes a Freedom of Information action to sort it out just before the next election.

But what would her motive be to make this up? Just craving the spotlight for a while?

She could have been stretching the truth or making stuff up to spice up her speeches. It's possible but it's also possible that she did have some inside knowledge. If the CIA had recently taken prisoners it's not the kind of thing they'd admit to anyways. Especially if those prisoners were freed in the raid, rendered to another government or sent to a cia blacksite. Obama probably left himself a lot of legal wiggle room on the topic of interrogations and rendition (I'm fine with that) but the Benghazi raid may end up uncovering some not so pleasant facts for lefties.

She's a crazy person? I mean, if the militias were rescuing prisoners, why wouldn't they, y'know, mention that? They tend to be very vocal about that sort of thing.

Given that the only thing I know about this woman is that she sent threatening emails to another woman that were so serious that the FBI got involved, I'm not inclined to credit her with much.

Absolutely - if the attackers had been trying to free prisoners they would have been very vocal about it, especially afterward. They'd have no reason to hide that, and plenty of reasons to publicize it.

She could have been stretching the truth or making stuff up to spice up her speeches. It's possible but it's also possible that she did have some inside knowledge. If the CIA had recently taken prisoners it's not the kind of thing they'd admit to anyways. Especially if those prisoners were freed in the raid, rendered to another government or sent to a cia blacksite. Obama probably left himself a lot of legal wiggle room on the topic of interrogations and rendition (I'm fine with that) but the Benghazi raid may end up uncovering some not so pleasant facts for lefties.

Why would the raiders make up some shit about a crappy video instead of saying "We are freeing our prisoners!"

Poor Pauline. Everybody who repeats this story makes her sound like a clueless twit. She was actually making the point that she recognized that she lived in a community that was isolated from the mainstream. The problem Fox viewers (up to and including Romney, apparently) is that they have no idea they're in a cocoon.

She could have been stretching the truth or making stuff up to spice up her speeches. It's possible but it's also possible that she did have some inside knowledge. If the CIA had recently taken prisoners it's not the kind of thing they'd admit to anyways. Especially if those prisoners were freed in the raid, rendered to another government or sent to a cia blacksite. Obama probably left himself a lot of legal wiggle room on the topic of interrogations and rendition (I'm fine with that) but the Benghazi raid may end up uncovering some not so pleasant facts for lefties.

That is quite a stretch based on the words of an obviously disturbed woman.

What a circus of unreliability. Terrorists, a mistress and the CIA. None of these are known for truthfulness over the years. All are known for conspiracy, secrets and righteous anger.

Terrorists, while they are in the midst of rioting and killing, generally yell out what they are rioting and killing about. If they believed there were prisoners, they wouldn't make up some silly shit about a video.

It seemed clear that anyone with foresight would hedge on who wins a close election, instead of making wildly inaccurate predictions that would be indisputably disproved on Nov 6.

Reminds me of "end of the world" cults. The insane ones pick a specific date and when that day comes they look foolish. The sane ones (con artists) never get that specific.

That's just the problem though. The cult leaders of the GOP never do look foolish to the right-wing faithful. Karl Rove wasn't just wrong about the election, he was staggeringly wrong, blowing right past incompetence and straight into the territory of raving idiots.

He still has his job. It's as if nothing happened.

And it's the same with Dick Morris, who's predictions where also preposterously far off from reality. But he still has his job. Nobody in his audience cares, as long as he'll continue telling them that they're right and just have a messaging problem.

Spectacles like this exist. Some men (and women) aren't looking for anything logical, or rational. Some men just want to watch the lib'ruls burn.

And as long as they do, the GOP will continue making useful idiots of them.

The thing that indicates to me that the GOP is in deep-running and long-lasting shit is the sheer amount of talk about secession, nullification and the like on a fairly innocuous site like Facebook.

I expected them to be upset. What I didn't expect was it going on for so long and the linked materials these people are using to support their points to be so absolutely crazy.

Even if the GOP can rein in the candidates they're fielding, they've still got to deal with the rank and file, who by all indications have lost their minds.

The GOP won over millions with talk radio, Faux News, and the RWNJ blogs providing a consistent alternate reality that played into the anger and resentments of the party base. Now those same people turn out to actually believe in all the craziest shit the RW noise machine has been pushing for years.

That's just the problem though. The cult leaders of the GOP never do look foolish to the right-wing faithful. Karl Rove wasn't just wrong about the election, he was staggeringly wrong, blowing right past incompetence and straight into the territory of raving idiots.

He still has his job. It's as if nothing happened.

And it's the same with Dick Morris, who's predictions where also preposterously far off from reality. But he still has his job. Nobody in his audience cares, as long as he'll continue telling them that they're right and just have a messaging problem.

Spectacles like this exist. Some men (and women) aren't looking for anything logical, or rational. Some men just want to watch the lib'ruls burn.

And as long as they do, the GOP will continue making useful idiots of them.

Chris Christie was notable for calling the President "outstanding" before the election, probably because he was smart enough to know he'd still have to work with the guy next year.

Noted. At this point I don't know who to believe, unless it's nobody yet. It's not as if mistresses/spokespeople are reliable sources. It's not as if the CIA is shy about lying to protect secrets. I'm still wait and see. wait and see if it takes a Freedom of Information action to sort it out just before the next election.

But what would her motive be to make this up? Just craving the spotlight for a while?

There's quite a lot to question about Broadwell and her motives right about now. She was Patreaus's biographer and mistress by his admission. Why would she have such CIA inside information? Was she in any way affiliated with the CIA beyond her personal relationship with Petraeus? We know that the FBI began investigating due to her threatening emails to a woman she suspected had the General's... attention. This does not indicate a level of stability. She also seems to be enjoying her current notoriety since I've seen promotions of her appearances on at least one talk show.

I find little credibility in her word on most any subject at this point.

I think it's kind of ironic that the same right wing sources who are always criticizing Muslims in other countries for being irrational when they protest and riot over things like that anti-Islam video are now finding it simply impossible to believe that the attack in Benghazi could have been motivated by the video - even when the attackers themselves said so, and even when there were protests and riots all over the Middle East because of it.

At some point, I expect the GOP to come up with its own Bill Clinton, who can bring the center back into the party and thereby wrest control of it from the crazies. I don't know when this will happen, because the crazy base in the GOP is far larger and better cocooned from reality than the democratic left was. Until that happens, I expect people like David Frumto remain lonely voices in the wilderness.

At some point, I expect the GOP to come up with its own Bill Clinton, who can bring the center back into the party and thereby rest control of it from the crazies. I don't know when this will happen, because the crazy base in the GOP is far larger and better cocooned from reality than the democratic left was. Until that happens, I expect people like David Frumto remain lonely voices in the wilderness.

It's hard to see how this happens --- the rabid RWNJs are the single largest monolithic voting block in the US, and make up the Republican primary electorate.

At some point, I expect the GOP to come up with its own Bill Clinton, who can bring the center back into the party and thereby rest control of it from the crazies. I don't know when this will happen, because the crazy base in the GOP is far larger and better cocooned from reality than the democratic left was. Until that happens, I expect people like David Frumto remain lonely voices in the wilderness.

Speaking of Clinton, the GOP can take comfort in the fact that in the last 20 years, the only way Dems have been able to win a Pres election is by nominating an almost superhumanly-talented 1-in-a-million politician. Don't see anyone like that for 2016.

At some point, I expect the GOP to come up with its own Bill Clinton, who can bring the center back into the party and thereby rest control of it from the crazies. I don't know when this will happen, because the crazy base in the GOP is far larger and better cocooned from reality than the democratic left was. Until that happens, I expect people like David Frumto remain lonely voices in the wilderness.

Until a candidate for POTUS can answer unequivacably "yes!" at a GOP debate when asked if s/he believes in evolution, climate change, and equal rights for all, the crazies are still in charge.

And it's the same with Dick Morris, who's predictions where also preposterously far off from reality. But he still has his job. Nobody in his audience cares, as long as he'll continue telling them that they're right and just have a messaging problem.

I can't remember the last time Dick Morris was right about anything he predicted, unless you allow him to change his predictions like a weather vane in a high wind, which is what he normally does. I was surprised to see him stick with being dead-ass wrong until it was too late to change this time.

Only The Amazing Criswell matches his record for totally inaccurate predictions, but at least Criswell knew he was a fraud.

But, as you say, no one in his target audience gives a rats ass about that.

Speaking of Clinton, the GOP can take comfort in the fact that in the last 20 years, the only way Dems have been able to win a Pres election is by nominating an almost superhumanly-talented 1-in-a-million politician. Don't see anyone like that for 2016.

I do - quite a number of them even. There is a great depth of talent in the Dem party right now. Elizabeth Warren, Deval Patrick, Cory Booker, Julian Castro... I can see any one of them achieving the office of POTUS in the future. Warren would be my first pick right now for 2016.

I do - quite a number of them even. There is a great depth of talent in the Dem party right now. Elizabeth Warren, Deval Patrick, Cory Booker, Julian Castro... I can see any one of them achieving the office of POTUS in the future. Warren would be my first pick right now for 2016.

Same here.
I don't see one republican with a fraction of the talent in any of those guys.

Speaking of Clinton, the GOP can take comfort in the fact that in the last 20 years, the only way Dems have been able to win a Pres election is by nominating an almost superhumanly-talented 1-in-a-million politician. Don't see anyone like that for 2016.

Speaking of Clinton, the GOP can take comfort in the fact that in the last 20 years, the only way Dems have been able to win a Pres election is by nominating an almost superhumanly-talented 1-in-a-million politician. Don't see anyone like that for 2016.

However in four years the electorate will be even less white than it is now, and I don't see the GOP improving its standing with minorities unless it gets its crazy racist base under control.

Until a candidate for POTUS can answer unequivacably "yes!" at a GOP debate when asked if s/he believes in evolution, climate change, and equal rights for all, the crazies are still in charge.

I won't be holding my breath.

I suspect this will take at least 2 cycles to play out. I think the GOP will nominate a wingnut ticket in 2016. I think they will have to because the base will scream that twice they held their nose and nominated "moderates" and both failed miserably. I suspect we will see Santorum, Palin, Bachmann and other loons duke it out. It will if nothing else be great fun. They will get blown out in a really massive way following which the wing nuts will either quiet down and accept reality ( that Church- not the campaign trail is a great place to express yourself ) or split from the party forming a new party of god fearing white Christians.

It's not a matter of getting its crazies under control, it's one of realizing that they can't cater to their base and win over minorities. It's one or the other at this point.

Yeah, this.

It's either keep pandering to the angry white guys or realize that pandering solely to them and to white resentment is a losing proposition in a country that's shifting demographically. You can't do both.

It's either keep pandering to the angry white guys or realize that pandering solely to them and to white resentment is a losing proposition in a country that's shifting demographically. You can't do both.

Ayep, if the base can't get past their fear of minorities, then the door's open, nobody's forcing them to stay in the GOP. I'm sure there's some third party out there that would love legions of aging white racists to prop them up.

In some ways, it would have been better for the GOP if Santorum or Huckabee had been nominated this year. The Obama landslide would have been awesome and nobody this side of Alex Jones on the sanity scale could muddy the waters with fake fraud charges.
The moral, intellectual, and political bankruptcy of the recent right would be obvious to all, there would be some genuine soul-searching, and the process of re-building the party might finally begin. As it is, the nuts get four more years to work their mischief and rake in their profits before the process can even begin.

You have to hit rock bottom first before you can generate an upward force.

It's not a matter of getting its crazies under control, it's one of realizing that they can't cater to their base and win over minorities. It's one or the other at this point.

This, this, aaaaaand this. The GOP has to choose: Does it want the votes of sensible, moderate people? Or does it want the votes of people that believe homosexuality and atheism should be criminal offenses?

They always try to make it about economics. Here in Georgia we have WSB, which now runs a daily lineup of Boortz, Pillbaugh, Hannity, and Erickson. All four of them mewl constantly about economics and do everything, absolutely EVERYTHING in their power to stay away from social issues.

Because they know they can't win on social issues.

But their candidates keep pandering to the whackjob fundamentalists. And sane people keep taking note of it. And it negatively impacts their electoral prospects.

Unless and until they cut out the gangrenous, festering pit of rot and decay that is their hardcore social-issues base, they don't have a chance in hell in modern America. Even after that they still have slim chances until they adjust their economics.

Ayep, if the base can't get past their fear of minorities, then the door's open, nobody's forcing them to stay in the GOP. I'm sure there's some third party out there that would love legions of aging white racists to prop them up.

I think if the CIA were really holding prisoners secretly, their statement would have been much less direct. The consequences for lying about this would be huge, because as they out they no longer have the authority to do this.

This is a case where Occam's Razor is clearly cutting on the side of the CIA.

BUT you can never kill a conspiracy theory. Any evidence that belies the conspiracy is just more proof of how far the other side will go to conceal the truth.

Even Josh Marshall pointed out the error in focusing on indie voters, namely that the GOP kept drawing in all the indies who'd jumped ship in the lead-up to '10, but still kept voting GOP. Those were the same folks who are now making noises about how they can't believe the party lost and how it might have won if it'd nominated Crazy Uncle Liberty.

They always try to make it about economics. Here in Georgia we have WSB, which now runs a daily lineup of Boortz, Pillbaugh, Hannity, and Erickson. All four of them mewl constantly about economics and do everything, absolutely EVERYTHING in their power to stay away from social issues.

Because they know they can't win on social issues.

They can't win on economic ones either, partly in thanks to OWS that changed the conversation from austerity and debt to income inequality. The GOP was taken out for being the party of the rich and for the rich as much as any social issue. The party certainly has no "fiscal responsibility" leg to stand on though many still argue that party virtue, as easily disproven by reality as it is.

Even Josh Marshall pointed out the error in focusing on indie voters, namely that the GOP kept drawing in all the indies who'd jumped ship in the lead-up to '10, but still kept voting GOP. Those were the same folks who are now making noises about how they can't believe the party lost and how it might have won if it'd nominated Crazy Uncle Liberty.

they seem to have missed the fact that most people calling themselves 'independants' these days are gop voters too ashamed to call themselves 'republicans' anymore

They can't win on economic ones either, partly in thanks to OWS that changed the conversation from austerity and debt to income inequality. The GOP was taken out for being the party of the rich and for the rich as much as any social issue. The party certainly has no "fiscal responsibility" leg to stand on though many still argue that party virtue, as easily disproven by reality as it is.

Yep, let's take a second and thank Occupy for giving us "the 1%" and making Romney's "47%" comments behind closed doors relevant to this election. More than anything else, they woke people up to the severe income disparity in this nation and turned that hatred on the people that Romney personified.

There is no question in my mind that they will put a woman or a visible minority on the ticket. They simply don't understand the difference between style and substance. So I would expect at least 1 of these 4 and perhaps 2 on the 2016 ticket. Palin/Bachmann/Jindal/Rubio. The fact that they will continue to speak to policies that discriminate against women and minorities will seem irrelevant to them.

There is no question in my mind that they will put a woman or a visible minority on the ticket. They simply don't understand the difference between style and substance. So I would expect at least 1 of these 4 and perhaps 2 on the 2016 ticket. Palin/Bachmann/Jindal/Rubio. The fact that they will continue to speak to policies that discriminate against women and minorities will seem irrelevant to them.

Then there will be the inevitable shock at a loss, followed by the inevitable cries of Democrats/liberals being racist and/or sexist.

Then there will be the inevitable shock at a loss, followed by the inevitable cries of Democrats/liberals being racist and/or sexist.

Well that's what they're doing for West. Claiming that liberals hate black conservatives so much that's the reason West was targeted. Nevermind that West is batshit. They're claiming the same thing about Mia Love in Utah and ignoring that Love was challenging an incumbent and two it's Utah where the percentage of self described liberal voters is probably less than the digits on our hands.

Then there will be the inevitable shock at a loss, followed by the inevitable cries of Democrats/liberals being racist and/or sexist.

I just expect a sort of shallow knee jerk reaction like this. They will sit around saying:

look at all the African Americans who voted for Obama just cuz he is black. We need to run a latino. and we need to run a woman so we can win the female vote too. Don't you see, if we win the latino and the women's vote we win the election. What could possibly make us lose?

sadly, there is a portion of the population that will vote this way. I think it applies to every racial demographic. No matter what they are saying there will be white folks who vote for white folks because they are white. Black folks who vote for black candidates because they are black. Latinos who do the same. I still remember sitting with my Jewish grandmother years ago watching the local news about a Jewish guy who had been arrested for swindling a bunch of people out of some money. Her comment: "can't be true. Not a Jewish boy". To be fair she was 95 and the Jewish boy was probably 50. /

sadly, there is a portion of the population that will vote this way. I think it applies to every racial demographic. No matter what they are saying there will be white folks who vote for white folks because they are white. Black folks who vote for black candidates because they are black. Latinos who do the same. I still remember sitting with my Jewish grandmother years ago watching the local news about a Jewish guy who had been arrested for swindling a bunch of people out of some money. Her comment: "can't be true. Not a Jewish boy". To be fair she was 95 and the Jewish boy was probably 50. /

[Link: www.politico.com...]
Related. Remember this guy? Heh. I remember seeing Sarah Palin tattoos four years ago. It's people like that give people who get tattoos a bad name and I am not just saying that because of the politics but because I find political tattoos by and large tacky.

Now that I think about my late grandmother, another story comes to mind. I was 16 and wearing a Lynyrd Skynyrd button on my jean jacket (don't ask), and to be fair it was not that big a picture but it was a picture of the entire band and she asked me if it was a picture of our whole family.// Off topic but a funny memory nonetheless. She was a lot of fun.

[Link: www.politico.com...]
Related. Remember this guy? Heh. I remember seeing Sarah Palin tattoos four years ago. It's people like that give people who get tattoos a bad name and I am not just saying that because of the politics but because I find political tattoos by and large tacky.

Luckily nobody's going to remember what that represents in, oh, about three weeks.

Goes all the way back to the Bush years. But yeah I like Bugs' better too. Love me some Loony Toons.

Brings back some very happy memories..... I just found an old drink bottle given to me by a friend, its shaped like Marvin Martin... my fav!

I wish some of those maroons out there would learn how to spell... But then we wouldn't have all the fun of mocking their lack of intelligence now would we? The bottom of the gene pool is eminently entertaining....

Brings back some very happy memories..... I just found an old drink bottle given to me by a friend, its shaped like Marvin Martin... my fav!

I wish some of those maroons out there would learn how to spell... But then we wouldn't have all the fun of mocking their lack of intelligence now would we? The bottom of the gene pool is eminently entertaining....

Good times. I always liked Daffy for some reason. He was so stubborn and persistent.

It's people like that give people who get tattoos a bad name and I am not just saying that because of the politics but because I find political tattoos by and large tacky.

Political tattoos are ridiculous. It's like getting a tattoo of a celebrity on your body. Why? I mean, I understand things like a book quote or a lyric that means a lot to a person, or hell, even something fandom related if you're that dedicated to a band or a comic book character or whatever, but a real person that you'll likely never meet on your body?

I'd never tattoo anything political on my body. If I'm putting something on my skin permanently, it's going to have some meaning to me beyond an election.

Good times. I always liked Daffy for some reason. He was so stubborn and persistent.

Some of the funniest scenes were of Daffy and Bugs going back and forth... Duck season... Wabbit season.... and so on... I just bought the Loony Tunes Platinum Edition DVD collection... I love to watch them when Dan's not home. He doesn't like cartoons for some reason.

This is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.

Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.

When Pages first went live it completely changed our blogging experience here. Who had never wished for a certain story to become a topic here? Then Charles kinda floated this idea about a favorite Pages kinda entry. That was a ...

So this gentleman in Cesena, Italy, really really wants the Foo Fighters to play there. So what does he do? He organizes an event of 1000 guitarists, bass players, drummers & singers all performing the Foo Fighter's hit, "Learn to ...

Thousands of people gathered in cities across the country on Saturday night to protest against the racist and homophobic attacks of the past few days. The demonstrations come in response to Thursday's mass stabbing attack at the Jerusalem Pride ...

CORAL DAVENPORT and GARDINER HARRISThe New York TimesAugust 1, 2015 WASHINGTON -- In the strongest action ever taken in the United States to combat climate change, President Barack Obama will unveil on Monday a set of environmental regulations devised ...

Saudi Arabia has reiterated its call on the international community to criminalize any act vilifying religious beliefs and symbols of faith as well as all kinds of discrimination based on religion. "We have made it clear that freedom of ...

Fewer than four hundred families are responsible for almost half the money raised in the 2016 presidential campaign, a concentration of political donors that is unprecedented in the modern era. The vast majority of the $388 million backing presidential ...

Over the course of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the number of civilian deaths has been staggering. In Afghanistan, more than 26,000 civilians are estimated to have died since the war began in 2001. In Iraq, conservative tallies ...

People who regularly read my byline will recall that back in April I wrote about poor Scott Walker making a huge gaffe just as it seemed like the Koch brothers, his presumed benefactors, were ready to go all-in on ...

More: abortion-funding-restrictions.pdf Each year Congress passes a set of 12 appropriations bills, which collectively fund government programs from October 1 of one year to September 30 of the next. Anti-choice legislators have continually used these "must-pass" bills as vehicles ...

Just after Barack Obama's re-election in 2012, disappointed conservative thought leaders came together at the annual CPAC conference in Washington, D.C. to strategize. Demoralized but determined, they formed a plan to fight a "30-front war to fundamentally transform the ...

A man who became agitated about his next-door neighbor mowing her lawn at night shot her and then ran a push mower over her body, authorities said Friday. Newsnet5 reported on Wednesday that Linda Ciotto, 62, was shot in ...

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg spent Wednesday night at Duke University Law School, reflecting on the term that just ended and other major decisions during her tenure. As the New York Times reported, she talked about what she ...

So this showed up at my house today, it's an election mailer from one Jeffrey Guice who is running for re-election to the Mississippi State Senate. As you can see, it included an interesting detail... So basically he's taking pride ...

I was catching-up with Cracked articles. I found an obvious click-bait article, "4 Sexual Preferences That Only Recently Became Taboo": cracked.com Knowing that, I read it anyway. From there, I read a depressing article, "5 Ways College Screws Over Poor ...

So I downloaded the Win 10 ISO image today, and started the install. The first thing I come across is a screen asking what I want to keep, my apps, data, and program settings, my data and program settings, or ...

Dirct Link: Huffington Post Arabic - Kudos! Good to see this. The link takes you right there, but for us non arabic readers, a helpful translate panel comes right up. You who do read arabic can judge the content, ...

NYT -- More Edited PP Videos in the Pipeline The activist behind the videos, David Daleiden, has said he has enough covertly recorded footage for perhaps a dozen videos that he could release, one a week, for the next few ...

haaretz.com From the article: Swedish nationalists are planning a gay 'pride' march through Muslim-majority districts in the country's capital, according to media reports and a dedicated Facebook page. The march, called 'Pride J&auml;rva,' is scheduled to take place on July ...

Democratic presidential candidates should take heed. They need to come up with a way to speak to this issue. Otherwise, in an Obama-less election, part of the Obama coalition may not be motivated to show up. Obviously, you can be ...